Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Startup
I disagree. All loss of life is terrible, but I think an intentional attack on civilians is more a national tragedy than an attack on the military. Even close to home, when a person joins the military, he or she voluntarily places himself or herself in harm's way. Other than the soldiers working at the Pentagon no one who died on 9.11 accepted that risk.
Although I do agree with you that Bush has a legitimate reason to use the tragedy so long as he does so respectfully.
|
Different times - different wars. Before the American Revolution, no army marched in the winter. Washington changed all that with his attack on the Hessians in Trenton. In 1941 it wasn't "honorable" to attack another country unless war was declared formally first. Japan botched this, they never meant it to be the utter surprise it was.
If you feel 9.11 was more a national tragedy then get used to "national days of mourning", because the wars we fight in the future won't be confined to battlefields and military installations.